MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340346722 · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30024-4

Scaling-up treatment of depression and anxiety: a global return on investment analysis

2016· article· en· W2340346722 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Chisholm, Kim Sweeny, Peter Sheehan, Bruce Rasmussen, Filip Smit, Pim Cuijpers, Shekhar Saxena

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeVrije Universiteit AmsterdamWorld Health Organization
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)Mental healthProductivityInvestment (military)Return on investmentGlobal healthMedicinePublic healthEconomicsPsychiatryEconomic growthProduction (economics)MacroeconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and disabling disorders, which result not only in an enormous amount of human misery and lost health, but also lost economic output. Here we propose a global investment case for a scaled-up response to the public health and economic burden of depression and anxiety disorders. METHODS: In this global return on investment analysis, we used the mental health module of the OneHealth tool to calculate treatment costs and health outcomes in 36 countries between 2016 and 2030. We assumed a linear increase in treatment coverage. We factored in a modest improvement of 5% in both the ability to work and productivity at work as a result of treatment, subsequently mapped to the prevailing rates of labour participation and gross domestic product (GDP) per worker in each country. FINDINGS: The net present value of investment needed over the period 2016-30 to substantially scale up effective treatment coverage for depression and anxiety disorders is estimated to be US$147 billion. The expected returns to this investment are also substantial. In terms of health impact, scaled-up treatment leads to 43 million extra years of healthy life over the scale-up period. Placing an economic value on these healthy life-years produces a net present value of $310 billion. As well as these intrinsic benefits associated with improved health, scaled-up treatment of common mental disorders also leads to large economic productivity gains (a net present value of $230 billion for scaled-up depression treatment and $169 billion for anxiety disorders). Across country income groups, resulting benefit to cost ratios amount to 2·3-3·0 to 1 when economic benefits only are considered, and 3·3-5·7 to 1 when the value of health returns is also included. INTERPRETATION: Return on investment analysis of the kind reported here can contribute strongly to a balanced investment case for enhanced action to address the large and growing burden of common mental disorders worldwide. FUNDING: Grand Challenges Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1,454
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet PsychiatrySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207